fixed it for ya.

Goons dont need anymore isk, im 90% sure they're the richest alliance in eve, even after getting disbanded.

and the bolded is your answer why i personally dont go to WH

Not only that but if you can go for days without seeing a soul where there's already no local, how is this going to revitalize null?

By removing local, smaller groups have a chance to actually make an impact on larger alliances and make names for themselves. The only way for smaller alliances/corps to get into 0.0 is by buying there way in which makes the super friends even richer then they already are.

that and what i said in a previous post a page before.

listen im not saying removing local will repair 0.0 but itll make it more interesting.

Look, by removing local you ensure that space will be empty and you won't have any targets to shoot.

That's exactly what we were just told WH's look like right now.

Removing local from null won't change that, so there'd be less combat.

Nobody benefits. Not small gangs, not blobs, nobody. Even miners suffer due to lower demand for materials.

In no scenario is this a good idea.

The absence of targets, however, is also the absence of target locks, weapon engagement, and ship destruction.

So your latter point is moot.

Your former point is possible right now, with local intact. In fact, local was there when all the great null-sec alliances took power. I guess you guys don't have the makings of a great null-sec alliance if you can't do this in the same environment as past greats.

I expected better points than this.

meta-gaming(BoB etc.)

planned disbandment(Tau Ceti Federation and that alliance that was previously in Red alliances space, forgot the name, etc)

Unplanned disbandment(BoB, Goons etc)

deserted space to occupy disband space(Goons AAA)

You seem to be willfully ignoring literally all the differences between WHs and nullsec, which have a huge impact on how the lack of local would play out.

I would like to take this opportunity to point out the obvious. Yeah, I already know there is going to be a lot of hate replies but oh well. I also said I was not sticking around. I lied. I just wanted to wait a see if someone with more experience than I would come along and post an intelligent thought for once. Ok on to the obvious!

This thread is now full of goonswarm trolls and are still the only ones defending local in nullsec. To those that are defending that are not a part of goonswarm, I believe you are corporate spies for goonswarm. If your not, prove it!

I vote a move to have this thread locked for ranting and redundancy of rants with no valid points all saying the same thing on both sides of the argument. Both side's points have been made here and there and duly noted I am sure.

I say all you goonswarm folks need to move out into W-space if you are that bored and hard pressed for money. Way more isk to be made in WHs than hisec and it's not as risky as you might think. You can literately go for days without seeing a soul unless your not keeping up with d-scans and staying in one spot for too long.

Edit: Special thanks to BoBoZoBo and Ra'Shyne Viper.

Cry baby!!!

Frankly, I don't think you have the balls to run in a W-space or without local. Cut away from local you crybaby carebear who wants to keep playing on easy mode.

Man, this is so ironic, listening to some wormhole dweller who lives off of the wonderful and profitable sleepers while protected by their PVE being concentrated in signatures which have to be probed down, and entrances/exits that are collapsible and also have to be probed down, while also not ever having to worry about hot drops literally ever, telling me how I'm the one with no balls playing on easy mode.

His character has been playing since August - it's possible he just doesn't have a full understanding of the game, or it's possible hat Kenneth is just an alt. If it's the former - there's nothing wrong with that, but pretending you know better than people who have been doing it for years is... a little arrogant.

You do realize, then, that the asteroid belts and anomalies being the majority of the PVE in null combined with static access routes makes the dynamic totally different than the situation in WH's, right?

And that we use local to find fights as well as to avoid them?

Local is a conflict-driver in null more often than not. It's valuable for fleet intel.

Guides don't necessarily teach you that. Experience does.

How does it drive conflict? Wouldn't it be best to use a separate channel for intel? Sorry, if I'm still hung up on this. I'm not getting the idea of spreading intel in local... unless it's bad intel. Like disinformation for the enemy. That would make sense to me.

Scroll back up the page to this post. Read the article I linked there for you - if you read it, it will answer these questions.

Local doesn't provide intel via its chat function, it provides intel via the fact that it shows you who is in chat, and therefore who is in system. If I'm mining Jaspet solo in the Seyllin system, for example, and I see someone appear in local, I'll check their sec status and leave if it's below 1, but if it's above I'll align to the nearest gate just in case.

Ok there are literally dozens of systems in each region.

Let's say we scan down a gang and they jump through a jump gate into a system with no local.

How will we ever find them?

It'd be like a blind man with a needle trying to pop balloons dropping from random positions in a 60 square meter room.

In short, you couldn't do it.

Ok there are literally dozens of systems in each region.

Let's say we scan down a gang and they jump through a jump gate into a system with no local.

How will we ever find them?

It'd be like a blind man with a needle trying to pop balloons dropping from random positions in a 60 square meter room.

in short, you couldn't do it.

Exactly. Enemies shouldn't be forced to jump into your blob, you dirty blobber.

They would never be fast enough to catch moving fleets.

[quote=Kenneth O'Hara]
Yes, I've tried. I've been a low-level skirmish-type FC on-and-off and believe me, we've tried. There's not always a person in local to give reports in our intel channels, so we try to spread people out to do this when possible.

Local drives conflict. You used to assert it prevented it.

Now you're asking us to try to get along without it and see how we might get by.

The answer has already been determined: We would kill less ships less often.

There's no getting around that.

Edit:

Local is always faster.

There's no need to experiment. People show up right away in local. You always have a delay with probes and scans.

Beyond that, even if you get them on scan, if they exit the system before you land from warping to them, now you have no idea where they went.

That is not how to drive conflict in null.

The skill of the FC is in seeing a report in intel from one local, followed by a report in intel from another local, and determining just where the heck the enemy fleet is headed. Good FC's take their fleets through the right bridges and head off the enemy at the pass. Poor FC's, however, chase them around like dogs, likely failing to corner anything but people who were tired of chasing shadows an hour ago.

Without local for intel in null, all FC's would more or less be bad FC's except for those who happen to be very lucky, if such a thing exists.

Good question.

The skill of the FC is in seeing a report in intel from one local, followed by a report in intel from another local, and determining just where the heck the enemy fleet is headed. Good FC's take their fleets through the right bridges and head off the enemy at the pass. Poor FC's, however, chase them around like dogs, likely failing to corner anything but people who were tired of chasing shadows an hour ago.

Without local for intel in null, all FC's would more or less be bad FC's except for those who happen to be very lucky, if such a thing exists.

Why do you want to reduce ship kills in null?

With the current system you don't have to be "dedicated." You can do your own thing -and- provide -instant- intel.

With a no-local setup, everybody has to be on the same page or nothing works for anybody. Nobody gets kills if anybody messes up. And like I said, you still don't know where they went if they leave system without local. D-scan doesn't pick up cloaked ships.

I'm sorry you didn't agree with my replies. They're not political and it's not elitist. We let brand new unskilled players into fleets with no experience whatsoever. Goons give them free Rifters. My alliance replaces their Rifters for free, which is nearly the same thing. We try to train them, but not everybody is a scout or a leader. But everybody can read local.

It's too bad that the harsh realities of internet gamesmanship turn you off to null. It seemed for a moment there like you were catching on to the idea behind it. The maps are complex. Not everybody has the mind for the geometry of solving puzzles like "where are these guys going?"

Local drives conflict in null-sec. Taking it away would be a nerf to anybody involved in producing the ships we destroy.

Further, it would not work the same as wormholes because we have static gates, static belts, static stations. It's a totally different envoronment. You can't just say we're copping out without having been there and tried it out. Sorry, that just doesn't fly.

I get it you're saying we're elitist because we let rookies participate freely.

Got it.

Still waiting for the common sense and logic, because it hasn't happened yet. Just because you say it is so does not make it so.

And saying the opposite doesn't make that any more true...
I say we are at a stand still then.
I am tired and I can't keep this going all night and you know this. That's why y'all played a tag team there because of all the different players in different timezones... Or, you all have no lives. Either way, I am going to bed. If you want to debate some more, go back and read my earlier post with Darth.
They refute Darth's arguments and also provides alternatives to replace local.

Literally not a single person has said this at all. The fact that you are a slavering simp and keep linking to disparate points has everything to do with your incapability of reading beyond the third grade level and nothing to do with the arguments being made.

Let me break it down for you.

Conflict is enabled by local: This is a fleet finding fleet function, the primary tool used by FC's and scouts to be aware of incursions into your space, or find the people you are fighting against. This has literally nothing to do with the second point at all except that both occur in the spaceship game eve online. The reason this is important in null and not wormhole space? Force projection and fleet size. I can reinforce an entire region in about two hours with supercaps and a large subcap fleet backing them up. Without local they would become virtually impossible to pin down if they had enough cyno alts spread around.

No local forces everyone to highsec: This is related almost entirely to isk generation, aka ratting/PI/what little industry actually takes place in null, aka actually "Living" in the space as opposed to just using it as a battleground that you return to when it is threatened. So instead of seeing a "Vibrant nullsec" full of people who live in it, you will see situations which if you were the expert on nullsec life that you seem to think you are you would know already exist. People who live almost entirely in highsec but only come back to nullsec when their infrastructure there is harmed.

And we get to the third point

Therefore all conflict is in highsec: no, because the two prior points are only linked in that they involve the spaceship video game eve online and local mechanics. What little population you see in nullsec already would simply move their daily activities to highsec and come back to null for fights. How do we know this would happen? Because it already does happen, especially in alliances with crappy hard to use space. Even in good space like ours roughly half to a quarter of our membership is engaged in risk free PVE in highsec.

If you tried to pop our towers we'd still come back to defend them, and we'd still keep our PVP ships in VFK.

It's not my fault you can't realize that there may actually be disparate issues with removing local, both quality of life wise and conflict wise.

Anything can be taken out of context when only half of it is quoted. It's actually sarcasm. Tongue in cheek. A play on words. The first two parts have been spoken by Darth and ohhh whats his face? Some one from earlier today. The conflict is actually referring to the nerd rage and temper tantrums that will ensue. There would also be more conflict on the market as well.
I am sure this will be butchered, misquoted, and taken completely out of contexts as well. That is what ignorant people do when they feel they could possibly be wrong. Like small children. Either way, I'm out guys. Good luck arguing amongst yourselves, playing children's card games or whatever you goons do during your free time.

Hey you know what would be crazy? If I liked a wikipedia article on ad hominem attacks and what it generally says about the person making them. Wouldn't that be just cheeky of me?

Jump bridges provide the solution to the dilemma you seem to be having. You see they changed routes, you're a good FC, you change routes too and cut them off - at a conventional gate - after warping off the jump bridge (and potentially doing minimal conventional travel).

That's just how it's done in the biggest most successful alliances in Eve.

I hope that answers your question.

Edit: We also try to pair the information gathered from local with information from D-scan, when possible.

Sometimes people are docked.

This may be hard for you to believe but in null-sec there are outposts.

You can change directions by jumping back through immediately.

Well, immediately or as fast as you can move 2.5km, whichever comes last.

They never actually say why that would drive people to nullsec.

You still aren't stating why that would drive people to nullsec, which is the crux of the entire argument. My "Local" solution that would make me happy, because yes I wander other peoples space and try to kill their ratters too would be for local to pop when I load grid. I can list the number of times I've landed on field right as the ratter was aligning his stupid dominix out and warping off on a millipedes toes, an extra few seconds would do a lot to make it so yes there is SOME risk if the ratter isn't paying attention, but it doesn't throw the ball entirely in either of our courts. If local was removed and I'm in a bomber the ball would be entirely in my court, and virtually always on my court unless every single gate was camped by a scanning ship reporting intel (which frankly is too much to ask of players).

You still aren't stating why that would drive people to nullsec, which is the crux of the entire argument. My "Local" solution that would make me happy, because yes I wander other peoples space and try to kill their ratters too would be for local to pop when I load grid. I can list the number of times I've landed on field right as the ratter was aligning his stupid dominix out and warping off on a millipedes toes, an extra few seconds would do a lot to make it so yes there is SOME risk if the ratter isn't paying attention, but it doesn't throw the ball entirely in either of our courts. If local was removed and I'm in a bomber the ball would be entirely in my court, and virtually always on my court unless every single gate was camped by a scanning ship reporting intel (which frankly is too much to ask of players).

That's literally what went on all summer and the better half of the autumn.

I mean literally in the most literal sense.

Indeed, that is why the direction scanner needs to be overhauled, before local can be touched.

It should reward active participation and skill and punish the unattentive without being a terrible, tedious pain to use.

He's just demonstrating how the reason wormholers reject those mechanics outright is the same reason we reject wormhole local outright.